Future trouble is Gaza’s fate

The Israelis continue to pound Gaza, two weeks after the heinous terrorist attack Hamas mounted against Israel. We don’t know how much the bombardment has hurt Hamas. Its militants presumably hide underground and among the civilian population. But it has certainly harmed ordinary Palestinians. They are suffering horribly as well from the embargo on food, water, and fuel going into Gaza.

The better option right now

Well-meaning people are calling for a ceasefire. But Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) would use a ceasefire to re-organize and re-arm. That would lengthen the conflict and prolong the agony of Gazan civilians. A ceasefire would also require international monitors. It is hard to imagine where those would come from.

A bombing pause would be a better option right now. The bombing hinders all aspects of civilian life in Gaza and will block delivery of humanitarian aid. It started to flow through the Rafah Crossing from Egypt this morning. Observers aren’t needed to monitor a bombing pause, which should apply to Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as well as Israel. Remote observation would suffice. Hamas and PIJ could try to use a bombing pause to re-arm, but Israel would be able to conduct raids to prevent that from happening.

The question of war aims

The Defense Minister told a Knesset committee yesterday that Israel’s war aims are

• destruction of Hamas’ military infrastructure;
• destruction of pockets of resistance;
• removal of Israel’s responsibility for life in Gaza and establishment of a new security reality for Israelis.

These are far more reasonable aims than I’ve seen quoted elsewhere. It makes no sense to destroy Hamas’ civilian governing infrastructure. That will be needed even during, and also after, the war to distribute humanitarian aid and health services as well as re-start education and other social services.

The ground invasion makes no sense

But the minister also appeared to promise a ground invasion: “Whoever sees Gaza from afar now, will see it from the inside.”

This makes no sense. Re-occupation of Gaza would be “fiendishly difficult,” to quote David Petraeus. The Israeli army knows that well. It has done it before. Now would be far more difficult, as Hamas is a formidable foe and well-entrenched. Israel’s cadres are largely reservists, not the professional special operations guys needed to ferret out Hamas. They will suffer many fewer casualties supporting the professionals from just outside Gaza rather than inside.

The new security reality

It is unclear what the minister meant by a new security reality. If it means higher walls and a tighter embargo, that is a formula for further radicalization in Gaza. Iran would no doubt like that and re-arm the radicals as best it could.

Israel will be tempted to try to re-implant the Palestinian Authority security forces in Gaza. But the PA has lost a lot of credibility with Palestinians. Its performance in the West Bank does not bode well. Hamas remnants would of course conduct guerilla operations against any PA presence.

I can imagine a multinational peacekeeping force in Gaza. But which countries would be prepared to lend it personnel? It would require tens of thousands of Arabic speakers. Egypt would decline, as it doesn’t take on more responsibility for Gaza. The Gulf would be uninterested. The North Africans likewise. Conditions at home would prevent Sudan, Yemen, Syria, or Iraq from lending a hand. Jordan would be skittish.

A wicked problem

Gaza poses wicked problems for which we don’t appear to have answers. Any attempt to solve one creates many others. Israelis are understandably less inclined to compromise than before the October 7 Hamas attack, even as Arabs understandably move towards more sympathy with Palestinians. That could mean trouble for a long time into the future.